Republican Convention notes from Amicus...Governor Palin

[Roxanne Appleby]

I was really looking forward to her speech. I was interested to hear how she was going to address the issues, deal with the mud that's been slinging around the past week or so...

I was surprised by the media/general reaction, because for me, she didn't hit anything out of the park. To me, she looked/seemed like a little girl doing just what Daddy wanted her to, and aren't you all so PROUD of me? She beamed like that... "Look, Daddy, look what I can do!"

And if she hit anything, it was a little league hit in a really small ballpark.

She's playing with the big boys in the majors now. I guess we'll see how well daddy's girl can handle herself when push comes to shove.

Hmmm. She put wood on some major-league curveballs that have been thrown at her. Per my previous post it wasn't a homerun, but I think this is too low a grade.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Oh! Alaska appeals to two kinds of people: Prospectors and saloon whores.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Hmmm. She put wood on some major-league curveballs that have been thrown at her. Per my previous post it wasn't a homerun, but I think this is too low a grade.

Just one opinion, but I just wasn't impressed. *shrug* I WANTED to be impressed. Honestly. I'm probably closer to voting Republican this time than I've ever been in my life and if anyone was gonna convince me, it would have been Palin.

She just didn't make her case, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[rengadeirishman]

as for her experience as governor of alaska. Alaska's a great place i'm sure, but it has only some 30000 more people then baltimore, baltimore which is 20th in population among big cities. I have to say i'm not impressed by that.

 

[DesertPirate]

as for her experience as governor of alaska. Alaska's a great place i'm sure, but it has only some 30000 more people then baltimore, baltimore which is 20th in population among big cities. I have to say i'm not impressed by that.

And yet for actual responsibility and accountability, it is more than Obama has ever done.

 

[sweetness6280]

Her dismembering of Obama was good, and funny, and exactly what a veep candidate is supposed to do. This is gonna be fun.

Those hoping for a meltdown in the debate are delusional. The woman is sharp, has presence and almost certainly can think on her feet. She didn't knock-off a sitting, establishment-governor in a primary by being a good teleprompter reader. Biden's peretual stridency on foreign policy, more often wrong than not, is a cornucopia for opposition researchers, and you better believe she will be armed and dangerous to him when she goes into that debate. If he tries to demean or belittle her - his usual debate style - it will be the biggest mistake he could make.

I discounted her voice, and the lack of a strong "speaker's stage presence," because she is new to the national stage and I wanted to hear substance.

We don't know what she will do in the debates. Most of this speech was written for her by a former Bush speechwriter. She did very well at something that is difficult: making someone else's words work. She also had moments (in which I suspect she was just being Sarah) that were strong, beautiful, and dynamic. Unfortunately, a lot of her substance, was filled with half-truths.

The fact-checkers have been busy through the night and this morning and there were many things that just aren't quite true, not just from Palin's speech.

Interesting that you should use the words demean or belittle, since that seemed to be the theme of last night: Demean and belittle Obama.

I wanted substance on issues.
I wanted to see the real Sarah Palin.
I wanted to be wowed.

I was disappointed.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I discounted her voice, and the lack of a strong "speaker's stage presence," because she is new to the national stage and I wanted to hear substance.

We don't know what she will do in the debates. Most of this speech was written for her by a former Bush speechwriter. She did very well at something that is difficult: making someone else's words work. She also had moments (in which I suspect she was just being Sarah) that were strong, beautiful, and dynamic. Unfortunately, a lot of her substance, was filled with half-truths.

The fact-checkers have been busy through the night and this morning and there were many things that just aren't quite true, not just from Palin's speech.

Interesting that you should use the words demean or belittle, since that seemed to be the theme of last night: Demean and belittel Obama.

I wanted substance on issues.
I wanted to see the real Sarah Palin.
I wanted to be wowed.

I was disappointed.

I'm glad I'm not alone. Thought I was going crazy there...

 

[Pure]

she told a lot of lies. she's one of the biggest 'earmark' whores in the business... nothing personal, but that's what alaska politicians do: talk up the frontiersman thing**, while making the big grab.


**mississippi senators were past masters of this: talk up the sovereign state, and depraved Washington DC, and go for the huge pieces of pork.

 

[amicus]

It is not surprising that our stalwart opposition found nothing impressive in Mrs. Palin's remarks. Her emphasis on individual effort and responsibility falls on the deaf ears of the left as they want to hear how government is going to solve the energy crisis and the healthcare crisis and a lagging economy. As if government had any solutions save higher taxes and more management restrictions.

McCain and Palin represent the best of American politics by vowing to preserve freedom and begin to remove the restrictions that have been in existence from the time of FDR and added to by the various 'great society' programs by the Kennedy's Johnson's, Carter's and Clinton's of our times.

McCain and Palin are campaigning on giving you something vastly more important than government largesse; it is called human individual freedom, wherein you are now free to travel the world.

Of course you wouldn't appreciate that. You don't understand it and secondly you have never been exposed to the literature of human freedom, only the Keynesian quasi-socialist economics of left wing liberal arts colleges and universities.

Such a deal...

Amicus...

 

[sweetness6280]

It is not surprising that our stalwart opposition found nothing impressive in Mrs. Palin's remarks. Her emphasis on individual effort and responsibility falls on the deaf ears of the left as they want to hear how government is going to solve the energy crisis and the healthcare crisis and a lagging economy. As if government had any solutions save higher taxes and more management restrictions.

McCain and Palin represent the best of American politics by vowing to preserve freedom and begin to remove the restrictions that have been in existence from the time of FDR and added to by the various 'great society' programs by the Kennedy's Johnson's, Carter's and Clinton's of our times.

McCain and Palin are campaigning on giving you something vastly more important than government largesse; it is called human individual freedom, wherein you are now free to travel the world.

Of course you wouldn't appreciate that. You don't understand it and secondly you have never been exposed to the literature of human freedom, only the Keynesian quasi-socialist economics of left wing liberal arts colleges and universities.

Such a deal...

Amicus...

Since you do not indicate at whom you direct your remarks, I will have to assume that I am among the intended.

I did not say that I did not find anything impressive in her remarks. Go back and read my posts. There were wonderful moments, but as a whole, her speech fell flat for me, and I wanted her to wow me.

Yes, I do want to hear how the McCain-Palin ticket would address the economy, our dependence on foreign oil, and the healthcare issue. These are issues that are of importance to the individual and collective American. Protecting our freedoms is incredibly important, however, how does having the freedom to travel the world benefit us, if we have not the means? We need serious domestic reform, and I want to know how each candidate will respond.

It is easy to say "Country First" and rattle the sabers of fear, but the realities that face our nation are much bigger than slogans and repartee.

I hope that tonight I will hear substance from McCain.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

I discounted her voice, and the lack of a strong "speaker's stage presence," because she is new to the national stage and I wanted to hear substance.

Substance is overrated in electoral politics at this level.

That's a little bit tongue-in-cheek, but check out this post. Here's the gist:

Much of the campaigns are about symbols, and the candidates themselves are primarily symbols. The symbols represesent a lot of very amorphous and ambiguous things, many having more to do with affect than effect. We touched on one the other day - flag pins, traditional nationalist attitudes about the world and non-traditional internationalist attitudes. What's the specific policy involved in that? It touches on a whole bunch of them, and involves an approach and attitude rather than than a particular policy prescription.

That's just one of thousands of such symbols and symbolized things that are in play in these contests. To try and distill it all down to a discussion about a handful of particular policy prescriptions is to distort it. It also may be "discriminatory" in an odd way, because non-policy wonks are just as engaged with the symbols, have just as much right to do so and have contributions just as legitimate even though they aren't armed with reams of facts and figures. The only "prohibitions" are on incivility and outright fabrication.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

McCain and Palin are campaigning on giving you something vastly more important than government largesse; it is called human individual freedom, wherein you are now free to travel the world.

except for a woman's freedom of choice about her own body...
and the freedom to marry whomever we choose...
and the freedom to have a conversation without having our phones tapped...
and the freedom to NOT have religion (i.e. creationism) taught in public schools, as our founding fathers dictated (separation of church and state, anyone?)...
and the freedom to live in a world not polluted by or dependent on fossil fuels...
and the freedom to have something so basic as health care be a free universal right...

my oh my does the list go on...

 

[epiphany65]

McCain and Palin are campaigning on giving you something vastly more important than government largesse; it is called human individual freedom, wherein you are now free to travel the world.

Amicus...

Except Cuba.

 

[sweetness6280]

Substance is overrated in electoral politics at this level.

That's a little bit tongue-in-cheek, but check out this post. Here's the gist:

Much of the campaigns are about symbols, and the candidates themselves are primarily symbols. The symbols represesent a lot of very amorphous and ambiguous things, many having more to do with affect than effect. We touched on one the other day - flag pins, traditional nationalist attitudes about the world and non-traditional internationalist attitudes. What's the specific policy involved in that? It touches on a whole bunch of them, and involves an approach and attitude rather than than a particular policy prescription.

That's just one of thousands of such symbols and symbolized things that are in play in these contests. To try and distill it all down to a discussion about a handful of particular policy prescriptions is to distort it. It also may be "discriminatory" in an odd way, because non-policy wonks are just as engaged with the symbols, have just as much right to do so and have contributions just as legitimate even though they aren't armed with reams of facts and figures. The only "prohibitions" are on incivility and outright fabrication.

I concur. Conventions are, after all, mainly just a huge "pep rally" before the big game.

I always want to hear substance, but what I expect, and usually get, is a lot of "rah, rah, rah, sis boom bah" and "we've got spirit, yes we do, we've got spirit, how bout you?".

Sighs.... but I don't stop watching them. The real debate comes after all of the hoopla fades, the streamers are swept up, and the funny hats/pins are put away for another 4 years.

I do not watch any political ads. I either get up and leave the room, mute it, or change the channel. I will watch the debates, all of them. Hopefully, they will be well moderated this go round.

In the end, I will make a decision that I hope will be mostly logical, tempered just enough with emotion to keep me human.

 

[amicus]

Sweetness...there is always substance in McCain's remarks, but most of the left, perhaps you included are already tuned out and won't hear or understand it.

America, indeed most of the western world, was founded on the simple ethics of Judeau Christian morality and work ethic, again, something the left has largely rejected.

I am an atheist, thus my basic premises are not rooted in Divine law, rather rational, objective understanding of human nature and human psychology, all bounded by real existence, reality and an acknowledgment of the absolute nature of existence, a world, pretty much, of black and whites, yes and no's, right and wrong, moral and immoral.

McCain and Palin are practical statesmen, politicians, in the current vernacular. They are neither philosophers or ethicists, so you will not be given a lesson in morality by either, instead you will be offered a practical plan for solving political problems that includes a continuing respect for human individual rights and economic freedom.

What you will hear, in terms of an overview, is, that to solve the energy crisis and make America energy independent, you need to get government out of the energy business and let the professionals meet the demands. And I do not mean just pumping more oil and natural gas, but the entire scope of the energy industry, as T. Boone Pickens, says, "All of it..." Remove all the taxes, restrictions and years of red tape away and the problem will be solved.

The same thing holds true with healthcare. There is a shortage of doctors and medically trained personnel in all fields. Why? Because the medical profession is largely bound by a 'guild-like' mentality of feudal Europe, control the market by limiting those who provide the services.

Just how a free market would solve that shortage is fertile ground for discussion but I suggest total, absolute freedom for those who wish to be career medical people to attend training and educational facilities that are privately funded by risk capital investors who will soon turn the medical profession into a fast-food like business, with an affordable clinic on every corner, like Taco Bell, Burger King, and everyone's favorite, McDonald's.

Medicine is a business, like education or any other demand for products and services, it is best supplied and most efficiently served by the free market place.

This is all economics 101 and the politicians are not there to educate you to the necessity of maintaining individual human liberty while supplying those necessary goods and services.

That is what the spirit of America, unlike any other nation on earth, is supposed to provide as a foundation.

But, like this forum, our socialist wannabees, still enamoured with Europe, yearn to be led and guided by a big daddy commissar.

Ain't it wunnerful?



Amicus....the radical capitalist and atheist on the side...

 

[rengadeirishman]

It is not surprising that our stalwart opposition found nothing impressive in Mrs. Palin's remarks. Her emphasis on individual effort and responsibility falls on the deaf ears of the left as they want to hear how government is going to solve the energy crisis and the healthcare crisis and a lagging economy. As if government had any solutions save higher taxes and more management restrictions.

McCain and Palin represent the best of American politics by vowing to preserve freedom and begin to remove the restrictions that have been in existence from the time of FDR and added to by the various 'great society' programs by the Kennedy's Johnson's, Carter's and Clinton's of our times.

McCain and Palin are campaigning on giving you something vastly more important than government largesse; it is called human individual freedom, wherein you are now free to travel the world.

Of course you wouldn't appreciate that. You don't understand it and secondly you have never been exposed to the literature of human freedom, only the Keynesian quasi-socialist economics of left wing liberal arts colleges and universities.

Such a deal...

Amicus...

I would have you know, amicus, that i take that as an insult, and i resent your implications. Education is not invalid simply because you don't like it. Do not presume to tell me what i do and do not understand.

Understanding and lock-step agreement are not synonymous.

And you could not possibly have any idea as to what i have read.

 

[sweetness6280]

ami,

I will judge the substance in McCain's remarks after his speech tonight. Sadly, there was little substance in the preceding speeches, but then that is often how it is designed.

I am not an atheist, which oddly enough does not preclude me from developing premises based on

rational, objective understanding of human nature and human psychology, all bounded by real existence, reality and an acknowledgment of the absolute nature of existence, a world, pretty much, of black and whites, yes and no's, right and wrong, moral and immoral.

I take issue with the statement that I will not be given a lesson in morality by either. Palin frequently mixes her theology with her politics. As a refugee from the religious right, I can tell you that the agenda there is to infiltrate and influence the current political clime according to the "will of God".

I have yet to see a practical plan from McCain-Palin, which is what I was hoping her speech would include last night. I heard a lot of patriotism, symbolic speech, and sniping jabs... but very little of a substantive nature. Just to make sure, I have gone back this morning and read the transcript of her speech. I stand by my original assessment.

I like Pickens Plan, btw (gasp, she is not as uninformed as he thought!), and I am interested to hear the candidates address the energy crisis.

We could have a healthy debate on the medical system, as I have family members in almost every aspect of it. I am also a citizen without insurance coverage. We agree on some points, but differ on others.

I have taken economics 101, tyvm, and I do not need to be educated on the

necessity of maintaining individual human liberty while supplying those necessary goods and services.

To assume that because someone maintains a different opinion than yours, they

yearn to be led and guided by a big daddy commissar

is again demeaning and condescending.

When one cannot effectively debate the issues without resorting to name-calling and unsubstantiated assumptions, perhaps one should re-assess one's confidence in one's own position.

 

[sr71plt]

I was sitting waiting to depart a cruise ship when I heard a replay of the speech. So, I only really heard snatches of the speech. I thought she had some amusing "connecting with the ball" points and I don't see anything wrong with her speech delivery (it's really, really hard to master giving speeches at this level), although I'm not wild about her voice (but it's a big improvement over Lieberman's).

I don't think either she or Obama have enough experience under their belts for the jobs they're seeking, so that one's a wash with me. Doesn't matter, however, there's no way in hell I'm voting anyone Republican this time around. They made a horrendous mess of what they had when they had it, and my message to all of them is to take a hike for a while.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I am an atheist, thus my basic premises are not rooted in Divine law...

McCain and Palin are practical statesmen, politicians, in the current vernacular. They are neither philosophers or ethicists, so you will not be given a lesson in morality by either...

Oh?

McCain, February 2008:

My most basic conservative principle: liberty comes from God.

And you're siding with a guy who thinks God runs the show...

curiouser and curiouser...

 

[neonlyte]

Please keep to your own side of the Pond!

Fascinating reading.

We've a guy who believes God dispenses Liberty, and a woman who believes sex education is wasted on children (and who apparently doesn't know the difference between visting a country and a refueling stopover) calling the other side 'flaky'.

You can see why so many people want to be American... can't you ?

Do you have any idea how stupid they look - both sides. Is anyone going to say anything about policy that isn't couched:
1) to denegrate the opposition
2) pander to either 'big business', the 'ignorant masses' or both simultaneously
3) tell the truth

Fuck me... You want me to believe this Veep is actually happy her 17year old is pregnant. That she actually has Foreign Policy knowledge when she's never visited anywhere foreign. I guess you get a lot of tourists in Alaska. Any one who thinks Palin was the right call needs certifying. Any one who believes McCain can be trusted after making this Veep call needs to spend quality time in a padded room. The worse of it is between 49% and 51% of the USA voters think this is a great ticket. And you wonder why your stock in the world is decreasing.

By the way... the UK is scarcely any better at choosing whom should make policy.

 

[Guest]

Kisses, neon.

I caught this today - Love it, muchly.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-j-elisberg/sarah-palins-speech-the-g_b_123965.html

Robert J. Elisberg

Sarah Palin's Speech: The Good, the Bad, and the Whoops

Posted September 4, 2008 | 02:31 PM (EST)


And so Sarah Palin has made her speech. And commentators were amazed she didn't collapse before their eyes. A crowd of 15,000 Republican partisans cheered wildly. The American public doesn't watch substance. So, therefore she hit a home run.

So, did she?

Perspective is important, because nothing exists in a vacuum. So, as I watched the speech, I tried watching it from three perspectives: Make no mistake. All three perspectives are very real. And more, all of them matter. Not just the razzle-dazzle.

For the first perspective, that was easy. Anybody can play to the house, and she did. It was big there. She did wonderfully. She got everyone dancing, because she blasted Barack Obama big time. It looked good and played great. It energized the Republicans, no doubt, and showed that this person everyone was saying was a nothing actually had some fire. To the house, she was absolutely wonderful. Beautifully done.

Let's now look at the second perspective: watching as undecided voters, people who are actually hurting and wondering which candidates will help them. I think Sarah Palin had some very nice moments criticizing Sen. Obama. She showed herself a feisty fighter. And it came across well. She presented a relatable side, someone who "gets" everyday folk. It was effective razzle-dazzle. Though much wasn't true ("Democrats will raise your taxes!!"), that's me knowing that. Some others won't, some will.

But watching as if undecided, I also kept thinking - a lot - "Okay, so, what are you going to do??" And I kept waiting for her to say something. And she never did. And as an undecided voter who's hurting, I started to get a bit annoyed. And I started to think, "George Bush was someone I might like to have a beer with, but he's who got me into this mess." I wanted someone to get me out. And on occasion I even gave myself credit to say, "Wait, I've watched some TV ads, and I saw Barack Obama's acceptance speech, too, and he didn't say that." So, on this second level, it played okay - pretty well in some parts, some good razzle dazzle for those who don't pay much attention, but for all those people hurting enough to care, it also had some huge, problematic, gaping holes.

Oh, and she put her children on the table, talking endlessly about her son going to Iraq. They're supposed to be off-limits.

But it's the third perspective that shocked me, and this is what most people have overlooked. And even though it affects only an audience of one, it creates significant problems. Because it swung the barn door wide open for Joe Biden. You must keep in mind that Joe Biden is a seriously smart man. Former chair of the Senate Justice Committee, and current chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He's one of the country's leading experts on world affairs - and during the Democratic debates, he gave lessons to all his highly-impressive opponents on the subject.

Watching the speech as if Sen. Biden, I could see his eyes gleaming every time Sarah Palin said we were "so close to victory in Iraq" and that Democrats want to "cave." In their debate, he will skewer her on this. Even the White House is now for setting time tables to withdraw. Iraq itself wants us out in 16 months - which John McCain has said we must do, because Iraq is a sovereign nation. When she blasted Mr. Obama about wanting to negotiate without preconditions - Joe Biden will detail not only American history in negotiating, but also note that the Bush Administration has now met with Iran without pre-conditions. Time and again, she opened the door even wider with ghastly foreign and domestic platitudes that will fall apart in the face of an expert responding. And Joe Biden will respond every time.

Yet none of this gets to the two most glaring gaps in her speech for a waiting Joe Biden. The first is what she wants to do about the issues that face America. The economy, housing, the environment, science, women's right to choose, stem cell research. Watching as Joe Biden, I couldn't wait to address these. Or her belief in teaching creationism. That Iraq is a mission from God. That global warming isn't man-made. She intentionally left all these out of her speech. Joe Biden won't.

The second glaring gap is her lack of experience. It can't be forgotten. Yes, she attacked Barack Obama - but she never explained herself. When your big accomplishment is selling a plane on eBay, your empty spaces are pot holes. What a mistake it was for her to belittle being a community organizer in the inner-city of Chicago. Really? It was Barack Obama's first job - right out of college. Incredibly impressive. Meanwhile, 20 months ago, she couldn't even be mayor of 5,500 people without the town bringing in an outside administrator to help her. Barack Obama's full career has been vetted by the American public and won 20 million votes. She has 114,000 in her home state. Before meeting face-to-face with Joe Biden, she had this one chance to build a defense why she was qualified to be a heart-beat from the presidency, even with zero experience in foreign affairs. She offered nothing in her speech. And let the door open.

But above all, there is one major issue that people are missing about this third perspective. And it's very real. And very serious. It may have been Sarah Palin's biggest mistake. If people are razzle-dazzled by the speech - then this speech raised the bar for her. She's no longer playing with low expectations, because she chose to slash and burn. Her one ace card was always the inability of Joe Biden to be hard on her. But that's gone, because she opened the door first, directly attacking her opponents on policy. This isn't isolated Alaska, where she's on safe, familiar ground. This is the full nation, the world, and everything is at stake. Her speechwriters went for razzle dazzle and ignored that, at her peril.

And lest you think this is a minor quibble - more people will likely watch Joe Biden and Sarah Palin debate than saw her speech.

So, finally, let's step back and look at Sarah Palin's speech in full. All those perspectives together. Not just "She beat expectations." Not just "People don't listen." Let's look at what her speech actually was.

Some of it was extremely good. She didn't show herself a disaster. She got some good, rousing responses. But her best parts -- her attacks -- left her glaringly open and without defense. Democrats couldn't seem "mean" before. Not any more, she attacked first. Foolish.

But mainly, this was just a speech. Written by others, that she practiced, practiced and practiced. The measure of her candidacy will be out on the campaign trail, facing the public and the press. And then facing Joe Biden..

In the end...she didn't say anything. She offered no proposals to get those hurting in America out of their problems. Name one. She offered no solutions for Iraq, Iran and North Korea. And with John McCain's serious health issues, that gaping hole of no answers and no experience will stretch wider, unaddressed.

And so this one speech is over. It likely went over well with many. Republican poll numbers likely will go up overnight. It happens at conventions. Yet recognize it in full: if this had been a keynote speech, it would have been ignored. There was nothing in it to suggest dazzling people for 19 months and winning your party's nomination for president. And now, Sarah Palin must enter that real world.

Sarah Palin's speech does not exist in a vacuum. It does not exist only in the Republican convention hall. It does not exist only in the eyes of those both smart and dull who'll see only razzle dazzle. It also exists in the eyes of those watching across America who are very hurt and want answers. And it exists in the eyes of the one man watching who will be debating her in front of a far larger audience.

The speech was good. And bad. The bad, though, is seriously problematic. And how her speechwriters opened the door to it was a big mistake.

 

[sweetness6280]

Kisses, neon.

I caught this today - Love it, muchly.

Robert J. Elisberg

Sarah Palin's Speech: The Good, the Bad, and the Whoops

Posted September 4, 2008 | 02:31 PM (EST)


And so Sarah Palin has made her speech. And commentators were amazed she didn't collapse before their eyes. A crowd of 15,000 Republican partisans cheered wildly. The American public doesn't watch substance. So, therefore she hit a home run.

So, did she?
...
The speech was good. And bad. The bad, though, is seriously problematic. And how her speechwriters opened the door to it was a big mistake.

Quote cut down to save space.

Excellent article, sarahh. I completely agree.

 

[neonlyte]

See... I'm with 'Bobbie' J.

No matter how much scorn Ami pours on our soft and Liberal European ways, we see a lot, a lot of politiks in Europe; at least one of our Club Members is being elected most trimesters and because we belong to the same Club, anyone interested in politiks takes note of substance and style. We get the speaking to different audiences, different constituencies. Hell, most European politicians even count the US of A as a constituent choosing their foreign policy words carefully with one eye (and ear) on American reaction even when chastising policy difference.

Generally, we (Europeans) don't like posturing... which is what is happening right now with the Republican Convention. It smacks of hollowness, and as Bobbie J says, "In the end...she didn't say anything. She offered no proposals to get those hurting in America out of their problems. She offered no solutions for Iraq, Iran and North Korea. And with John McCain's serious health issues, that gaping hole of no answers and no experience will stretch wider, unaddressed.

McCain may have those answers, but they are not answers most Europeans will like, and whether you like it or not, Europe is the USA's largest constituency. I'm left hoping, if the Republicans win the election, McCain survives long enough to see someone else elected.

 

[jomar]

Fascinating reading.

We've a guy who believes God dispenses Liberty, and a woman who believes sex education is wasted on children (and who apparently doesn't know the difference between visting a country and a refueling stopover) calling the other side 'flaky'.

You can see why so many people want to be American... can't you ?

Do you have any idea how stupid they look - both sides. Is anyone going to say anything about policy that isn't couched:
1) to denegrate the opposition
2) pander to either 'big business', the 'ignorant masses' or both simultaneously
3) tell the truth

Fuck me... You want me to believe this Veep is actually happy her 17year old is pregnant. That she actually has Foreign Policy knowledge when she's never visited anywhere foreign. I guess you get a lot of tourists in Alaska. Any one who thinks Palin was the right call needs certifying. Any one who believes McCain can be trusted after making this Veep call needs to spend quality time in a padded room. The worse of it is between 49% and 51% of the USA voters think this is a great ticket. And you wonder why your stock in the world is decreasing.

By the way... the UK is scarcely any better at choosing whom should make policy.

Though you must admit, style points go to the Dems. The Reps mocking condescension looks adolescent, not becoming of the party, especially if endorsed by John McMain.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Kisses, neon.

I caught this today - Love it, muchly.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-j-elisberg/sarah-palins-speech-the-g_b_123965.html

Robert J. Elisberg

Sarah Palin's Speech: The Good, the Bad, and the Whoops

Posted September 4, 2008 | 02:31 PM (EST)

Disingenuous BS. Phoney "evenhandedness." Another journalist in the tank for Obama and trying to fool readers into thinking that he's "objective." Not fooled. Not impressed.